Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Nathan Stewart Promises WotC will do something with new settings in 2018
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7291383" data-attributes="member: 12731"><p>Actually, I didn't mean to whine - my first thought on reading what you wrote was "not going to happen that they send off the reader to another non-core book". I just remembered the reprint alternative at that point.</p><p></p><p>What I dislike about the reprint strategy isn't so much the actual reprint. I acknowledge the argument that the actual space used up isn't much to fuss about in itself. </p><p></p><p>What I dislike is instead two other things:</p><p>a) if the pace of supplement weren't already glacial, I would be better disposed to already starting to reprint material. As it is, I don't object to the wasted space so much because its 20 cents of my book that I already have, but because if we're only going to get a single book of crunch a year, it better all be brand new content! It raises my hackles that they have the temerity to first lower the crunch pace that much and then <em>on top of that</em> offer reheated content too! Talk about wanting to find out exactly how little they can get away with!</p><p>b) the way WotC defenders make reprints out to be a <em>good</em> thing because "PHB+1"*. <strong>Hell no.</strong> Reprints is never a <em>good</em> thing. At best, it's better than the alternative "Optimal use of this book requires the Pancake Juggler's Handbook I & III". That does not make it an actual good thing, especially given the slow pace of a). </p><p></p><p></p><p>Zapp</p><p></p><p>PS. And don't even get me started on those who actually <em>want</em> "PHB+1"** to be a thing for general play... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite4" alt=":mad:" title="Mad :mad:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":mad:" /> If we only have a handful of supplements, and almost zero options that actually make the build complexity <strong>deeper</strong> (as opposed to "wider"; that is build choices that provides more decision points on a <u>single given</u> character as opposed to just providing more ways to build new different characters), they all better be usable and balanced <strong>together</strong>. I am paying WotC to do <em>something</em>, after all - and they don't get to walk away from the difficult part! For organized play PHB+1 is a necessary evil (since the individual DM is no longer empowered to cut out the inevitable corner cases), but for general play there would only be one winner: WotC, who would be able to charge us the same amount of money, but with a <em>vastly lower work effort</em>.</p><p></p><p>*) In the reasonable sense, that is "we have decided not to publish a book that requires a non-core book". Great. Now if that were an actual problem, we might feel a bit grateful. At the current slow trickle of new crunch, however, this won't have the intended impact (that there's three books you decide between, and you want to make sure you don't buy one that relies on content you don't have).</p><p>**) In the unreasonable sense, that is "we won't spend our time balancing this book's content with earlier splatbooks, because we don't want to spend time on actually difficult design. We'd rather just count the money you spent. This PHB+1 thing is great!"</p><p></p><p>PHB+1 was supposed to be a convenience <strong>for us</strong>. Not a cost saver or excuse for unambitious balancing for WotC!!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7291383, member: 12731"] Actually, I didn't mean to whine - my first thought on reading what you wrote was "not going to happen that they send off the reader to another non-core book". I just remembered the reprint alternative at that point. What I dislike about the reprint strategy isn't so much the actual reprint. I acknowledge the argument that the actual space used up isn't much to fuss about in itself. What I dislike is instead two other things: a) if the pace of supplement weren't already glacial, I would be better disposed to already starting to reprint material. As it is, I don't object to the wasted space so much because its 20 cents of my book that I already have, but because if we're only going to get a single book of crunch a year, it better all be brand new content! It raises my hackles that they have the temerity to first lower the crunch pace that much and then [I]on top of that[/I] offer reheated content too! Talk about wanting to find out exactly how little they can get away with! b) the way WotC defenders make reprints out to be a [I]good[/I] thing because "PHB+1"*. [B]Hell no.[/B] Reprints is never a [I]good[/I] thing. At best, it's better than the alternative "Optimal use of this book requires the Pancake Juggler's Handbook I & III". That does not make it an actual good thing, especially given the slow pace of a). Zapp PS. And don't even get me started on those who actually [I]want[/I] "PHB+1"** to be a thing for general play... :mad: If we only have a handful of supplements, and almost zero options that actually make the build complexity [B]deeper[/B] (as opposed to "wider"; that is build choices that provides more decision points on a [U]single given[/U] character as opposed to just providing more ways to build new different characters), they all better be usable and balanced [B]together[/B]. I am paying WotC to do [I]something[/I], after all - and they don't get to walk away from the difficult part! For organized play PHB+1 is a necessary evil (since the individual DM is no longer empowered to cut out the inevitable corner cases), but for general play there would only be one winner: WotC, who would be able to charge us the same amount of money, but with a [I]vastly lower work effort[/I]. *) In the reasonable sense, that is "we have decided not to publish a book that requires a non-core book". Great. Now if that were an actual problem, we might feel a bit grateful. At the current slow trickle of new crunch, however, this won't have the intended impact (that there's three books you decide between, and you want to make sure you don't buy one that relies on content you don't have). **) In the unreasonable sense, that is "we won't spend our time balancing this book's content with earlier splatbooks, because we don't want to spend time on actually difficult design. We'd rather just count the money you spent. This PHB+1 thing is great!" PHB+1 was supposed to be a convenience [B]for us[/B]. Not a cost saver or excuse for unambitious balancing for WotC!! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Nathan Stewart Promises WotC will do something with new settings in 2018
Top